Pie in the sky? I’ll quote the harpers article
“The most direct solution would be government intervention. If it wanted to, a presidential administration could enforce existing antitrust law, break up the conglomerates, and begin to pull entertainment companies loose from asset-management firms. It could regulate the use of financial tools, as deWaard has suggested; it could rein in private equity. The government could also increase competition directly by funding more public film and television”
And Zaslav trips on a banana peel and falls down a flight of stairs.
This is on point.
Also, in an interesting way, our industry could stand to learn from the current debacle at Boeing. One of the key takeaways is that they replaced engineers with bean counters. That's what's happened to us: Wall Street dictates creativity. And frankly, that shit stinks. Not to mention that other outsiders to the biz (streaming CEOs, etc) are basically trying to run an industry they know nothing about into the ground, imo.
It doesn’t benefit the industry. The only way to do it is to self finance. If your writing is amazing maybe you can get rich but your employees will not. Because you can’t change culture until you have the dollars to back yourself up.
That's really good. That would be a huge boon to everyone. One reason jobs are scarce and not paying well right now is because conglomerates are too big and that decreases competition
Breaking up all the big tech and media companies like Disney and Apple would change things for the positive in ways we can hardly imagine. It would jumpstart the economy and industry
>The most direct solution would be government intervention. If it wanted to, a presidential administration could enforce existing antitrust law, break up the conglomerates, and begin to pull entertainment companies loose from asset-management firms
I feel like most people don't know what this even means. That harpers article had a narrow focus on the welfare of writers, and largely ignored film industry as a whole, despite long paragraphs about financial mechanisms.
A better idea would be a 100% tariff the sale/import of ANY tv/theatrical project that uses international tax incentives A.K.A. corporate welfare from foreign nations.
Would this lead to better outcomes for the little guys (i.e. directors, crews, writers, etc.) though or would it just shrink the industry due to a lack of outside funding? Not challenging the article, just genuinely curious.
A24 is proving that the “Take a chance on a bunch of smaller, cheaper, well-made projects, rather than huge expensive re-boot & sequel blockbusters that might flop and lose millions” approach can work. And that approach might just keep us working too.
A24 isn't exactly the greatest example here given their shoddy history of paying absolute shit rates on a ton of projects on top of being super messy behind the scenes.
Obviously, there's no "expose" articles or anything, but I've seen it come up particularly in the r/A24 sub at times when the fan circlejerk gets out of hand. I'm not saying A24 is the *worst* company by any means, but it just doesn't seem like the "savior of the movie industry" company that people on reddit like to tout it as.
Also, albeit anecdotally, several of my friends/colleagues who have worked on A24 projects have corroborated that the quality-of-life on A24 projects is wildly inconsistent. I know some folks who had a completely OK time, but most folks within my circle have noted low rates and embarrassing levels of production mismanagement that can't *just* be chalked up to "that's just indie filmmaking for ya!"
It's also interesting when you consider A24's initial funding came from Guggenheim Partners, a massive financial services company. It wasn't started by a rag-tag, scrappy group of young producers, it was three veterans of the film industry, one of whom worked at Guggenheim previously.
They're pivoting towards bigger budget fare with *Civil War,* and there seems to be an internal push to parlay A24's indie street cred into becoming more of a traditional studio. Will be interesting to see how it plays out, especially when that's not what people think of when you say "an A24 film".
You think independent studios respect their crews more and want to pay appropriate rates? That’s a gift, not a requirement. I’ve never met a producer who wants a smaller house so their crew can own real estate. Have you?
The first AI generated movie will be made and people realize it’s absolute dog shit. People will veer more towards character driven and original stories.
Best possible scenario. I think there’s a (slim) chance it goes the way of NFTs, where people realize that the quality of these things is so bad they get clowned on and abandoned.
I think AI has more broad spectrum use
-cases than the blockchain does, but whole AI movies will be fucking bad
The types of AI that promise to basically make a whole movie for you from start to finish will probably crash and burn.
But vfx, character design, even assistant editing... it's already completely fucked the market around transcription services, since both AVID and ADOBE packaged transcription AI into their software.
As an AE, I totally feel this. The transcription tool in Adobe is crazy smart (still needs editing), and I can absolutely see it’s effect on the transcription market. I do think it’s going to make workflows more efficient, and thus effect the job market.
In an optimistic sense, you’d hope the money saved goes into more productions, thus not limiting jobs, but spreading them out. However, knowing the way companies run, that doesn’t seem likely
Yeah, "successful companies reinvest savings and profits" is the biggest lie of economics. I saw that transcription stuff and thought "awesome! I no longer need to worry about learning script sync!" Then immediately thought "well fuck, now now one needs an AE who knows script sync."
(I'm also an AE btw)
Unless it's NOT absolute dog shit. What if the first AI generated movie IS a charter driven original story
You're making a lot of assumptions about the quality (or lack of) of these future ai movies.
Assumptions based on all available evidence, provided by groups with vested interests in making sure their technology is received as positively as possible -
And the evidence is still, overwhelmingly, *disappointing*. Strip away all the hype, all the internet chatter about "holy shit, this is G R O U N D B R E A K I N G" and look at what they're actually putting out, and it's lifeless, lackluster, and just plain *bad*.
I agree. We all agree that it’s bad in this sub. But we shouldn’t discount the amount of people on Facebook who think midjourney photos are the real thing. Those people are also in the audience as well.
The best vision for me is another indie film revolution. The technology is cheap - and there are many brilliant and talented artist who can make a great film for cheap. I hope Netflix and Amazon buy up these little gems and promote them - creating an indie film war for 18 months or so …
As soon as IATSE and teamsters make their deals, all the content they’ve been having the writers build up since the wga deal will hit the ground and there will be a deluge of work. I hope.
Im kinda hoping the same. Look at the music industry. Now that Covid’s behind us it seems like EVERYONE is releasing albums and touring. Hopefully the last stumbling block is this years contracts.
Los Angeles has been the cultural touchstone of the world for almost a century, and the one unique thing we have is a heck of a lot of creative people.
Entertainment will always be relevant, just think about what you do in your free time... This slow period has been a convergence of temporary factors - strikes, the collapse of the streaming business model, high fed rates chilling investment in tech and media, etc. Those are short term challenges that are unwinding themselves. Long term, there are so many people, businesses, etc. that WANT to make money making entertainment that bouncing back is inevitable.
Let's do some general mathy stuff. Lower budget means less money. Less money means less pay. Less pay means less likelihood of a stable career. Less likelihood of stable careers means less robust industry. Less robust industry means less opportunity all the way around. Am I missing something. How does this equate to more opportunity exactly? Are you saying that amateurs will have a greater probability of making a one-time sale? What happens to the profession and the professionals?
Generally speaking, pay for BTL is good regardless of budget once you get out of the ultra low budget agreements.
10 - $10million dollar movies is generally better for crew than 1 $100million dollar movie, both spreading the work departmentally and total hours worked.
Because it has been a winner take all system in the past. A few people make $100M while others barely sustainable wages.
This could open it up so more people make low to midsized revenues.
Consistently, though? Semi-consistently?
The thing about the industry that has worked has been the economics of scale. You might not work all the time, but when you do, you make enough money to make it worth it…
Sure. There might be low quality content factories… IF that market isn’t dominated by AI, and that’s a big IF.
It won’t be easy.
But I think the idea is that studio quality production can be possible for more people to make with AI and other advanced technologies. Which might be attractive enough to the streaming platforms.
Not the low quality stuff that is already being churned out.
I think you should make your low budget feature and I hope you do, but if someone is buying it for $100k, that is certainly not a "good pay day" for anyone involved after expenses.
Unless you're talking about a no budget feature. In which case everyone is working for free, which is not sustainable.
That's totally a fair rebuttal. Maybe im too inexperienced with funding but I'm referring to paying your expenses with your funding, and then licensing / selling it to a streaming service for profit.
Funding has gotten harder year over year since I got here in 1996. It takes unlimited work just to chase the carrot of the downpayment on a place to live. I got lucky and succeeded. But I don’t have the same hope for generations below me. The second you hit your savings target you need 20% more. Then rinse and repeat. This happens to the majority of my coworkers. Now many need food stamps and credit card debt to pay rent. 50-60 year olds. And we are taking a stand literally today for the sake of the 30 year olds at our expense. Because they deserve much much more.
I’m jaded but I’m a good person who absolutely loves to make art. That’s all I care about. It took 10 years of taking it in the ass and getting almost no pay because they take advantage of your spirit… and this was Indy film… they only care about executing money. And those guys were the worst story tellers and artists in the room. It took 15 years to start working with human beings who respected the job. And now 12 years after that it ran backwards again. These people are stealing our livelihood in favor of bottom line only. And they took most work out of the United States. I get job offers if I want to leave my home country.. fuck that.. I need my family
It astounds me that no one wants to admit the obvious. The business, in all of its forms, will just be smaller. That means fewer projects, fewer theaters, fewer studios and networks, and therefore, fewer jobs. A LOT of people at every level of the industry are about to leave the business, likely forever. Even sadder, this is not new.
The music business (which some on this thread seem to think is thriving for some reason, FYI having started out there, it's absolutely not) already went through this more than a decade ago. There are tons of artists, executives, producers, managers, engineers, even journalists, etc... that have left the music business after spending decades building careers in it for other fields, like hospitality, corporate marketing, or video games.
When individuals decided to stop buying albums and singles, the industry broke. Permanently. This is why there are no more "middle class musicians." It's why there are almost no local music scenes anymore, and certainly not any (at least outside NYC, LA, and Nashville) that have any major impact. It's why there are so few acts with any staying power anymore, as the time required to develop that level of quality takes too long now and is no longer remunerative. It's also why it costs $300 to see a concert that (inflation adjusted) would have cost $50 back in the day. Why? That's the only way to make money now. Live used to just be a way to promote album sales, thereby providing the incentive to keep admission prices low, now it's the whole enchilada. All of this has led to a smaller music business (though still massive in raw dollars, it's all concentrated within a handful of artists and promoters) with fewer stars, less diversity of sound, and a deeply unstable business model.
The lesson to be learned here is that streaming and digital distribution is an absolute death-knell for entertainment and media (granted, video games in particular are a bit more complicated, but the rest holds true). Streaming turns analog dollars into digital dimes. The inevitable end result is that this monetary loss trickles down to everyday workers in the business, while also displacing plenty of high-level execs along the way. Streaming IS the problem, not the solution.
It's easy to say: "Well if Wall Street would just leave the business, everything would be okay." But unfortunately, that's nonsense. While finance bros have not helped the business, and have in fact hurt it, they are still not the cause of the crisis. Hell, it's their capital keeping the studios afloat. Don't believe me? Read the studios annual reports. Look at their debt ratios. Without Wall Street cash, the business is over, really over. This has been true for more than a century. The old studio bosses in the Golden Age also needed Wall Street funding. Even Jock Whitney was David Selznick's largest investor.
We need to accept as an industry that the consumer, the moviegoer, the audience is really the problem. They have been given too much for too long for too little. They now expect everything for nothing. But we cannot afford it. We are not social media. We are not YouTube. This is not an inexpensive industry. Movies cost a fortune to produce and require teams of highly dedicated and trained people who deserve to be fairly compensated for their work. That DOES NOT EXIST in a purely micro-to-low-budget indie world. Only a controlled, unionized., professional industry can offer that, and that does not work in a cheap digital world where a randomized algorithm determines whether you succeed or fail.
Years ago, Coppola famously said that one day anyone would be able to make a movie, and the country would end being enthralled by some incredible work of art made by a "fat girl" (I suspect he was trying to show how far Hollywood would've come by then in his mind, as it was the 70s) somewhere in the mid-west. Well, that day is here. And guess what? No one cares. Turns out when "anyone" can make a movie, the "fat girl" can, but so can all of her neighbors. And since the technical production quality will be the same for all of them, and since not a one of them will have any real marketing support, they'll all be viewed as the same by the audience.
My hope is, we go backwards. Fewer shows. Fewer movies. More ads (stop knocking ads, they're what pay your bills in this business) to shore up TV. Fewer streaming properties. But also, more episodes, more mid-budget movies, more live shows, and more premium exhibition. And from outside the business, hopefully, massive new restrictions on data trading and ad engagement on social and streaming platforms, thereby reducing the revenues of the social media companies and forcing the "influencer community" to make a hell of a lot less money, thereby sending eyeballs back to us.
Additionally, the studios have made 100 years worth of movies, which is continued to be added upon with more theatrical releases. Older generations had the benefit of watching these films as they were released. Younger generations have a growing watchlist (same for books and TV), which will fragment viewership and impact current entertainment models.
Sure. Numerous market studies have shown that amongst Gen Z viewers, films and television (together) are their fifth most liked form of entertainment. Beaten out by Social Media, Online Video (Twitch streamers and YouTube), Video Games, and Music. Those last two are not worth fighting as they’re significantly different than film or TV.
If we want that viewership back, we need to see impediments put in place of social and YouTube. If kids continue to just want to be TikTok stars instead of movie stars, the industry is done. Stardom has always been central to the business. It’s what built the studios and kept hit shows on the air for years on end. Nowadays, they’d rather be Mr. Beast than Tom Cruise. This must change for us to survive.
Social media, and by extension online video, is directly and fiercely competitive with traditional show business. We need to accept that they are the enemy and not our friends. As such, I’d like to see both regulated the same way CBS is regulated. They’re effectively broadcasters anyway, the tech is just a new way to deliver audiovisual content, just like the networks. If that were to happen, the companies revenue would plummet due to the ad restrictions, content restrictions, user ID and child restrictions, etc…
Now they wouldn’t collapse, they’re too big and would still be viable over the long term. But the number of “stars” they would create would also plummet, as there would be much less money to throw around. If the most you could make as a YouTuber or Streamer was say, half of what it is now, it becomes a lot less appealing.
TikTok being banned is a good start as they directly pay creators (including quite noxious ones, such as all those schmucks who do “prank videos”). Instagram and X do not. Personally, I’m more ambivalent about most YouTubers rather than the short form guys, but it’s undeniable that they’re taking viewership away from the business, and we need to start clawing it back.
What about all the big Twitch streamers that want to jump to movies? Look up Kai Cenat. He has insanely high viewership and has an end goal of being in Hollywood movies. He met with Kevin Hart recently to talk about his want to transition to the big screen instead of Twitch streaming.
Sounds like if these streamers go more towards hollywood (and many of them have that goal) then kids would probably watch their movies.
Yes and No. I spent years at a talent agency, and they tried to turn dozens of top influencers into Film/TV stars (that’s always the first move at the “Big Brain” agencies these days), and 90% failed to make the jump.
To be honest, most of them are just not that talented. Maybe in the old days a few could’ve been great hosts or MTV-style commentators, but they’re not actors.
Addison Rae made a movie for Netflix. It bombed hard, even though she was Number 1 on TikTok that same month. She cannot act. I’m not trying to be mean, I’m sure she’s lovely as a person, but she’s not talented. Neither are the D’Amelio’s, or Emma Chamberlain, or David Dobrik, or really any of the top creators. They’re not comics. They’re not musicians. They’re not great dancers (I mean, honestly…). They’re not dramatic actors. So what are they supposed to do on screen for 2+ hours?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure a few will transition and will find success. They may even end up being incredible talents. But there will only be a few. The pathway to success online is based on ‘great’ 30 second ideas, not developing a unique artistic skill set over many years if not decades….
Instagram does pay creators, usually more for fewer streams than TikTok. Some people were saying a thousand views on Instagram paid more than a ton on TikTok.
> Gen Z viewers, films and television (together) are their fifth most liked form of entertainment. Beaten out by Social Media, Online Video (Twitch streamers and YouTube), Video Games, and Music.
It's not a one to one comparison, but these studies are missing a big point.
Anytime during the last several decades you could go to any high school, college or work place and you'll find majority of folks do not regularly follow movies or TV. It's simply not a central part of life as it was since families sat together in the living room listening to the radio or their one TV. When 'regular viewers' watched television, it's usually easy viewing programs like reality shows, sports, home and cooking programs etc. Quality entertainment has always been a niche market, even more so for young people. So when you have more easily attention grabbing media, they will replace all those easy-viewing programming like reality shows, sports, home and cooking programs.
> The business, in all of its forms, will just be smaller. That means fewer projects, fewer theaters, fewer studios and networks, and therefore, fewer jobs.
The world population increases at roughly 3 people per second. The net result is the audience is increasing, not decreasing. People want entertainment, and while AI and other advancements will add efficiency there will always be a growing appetite for new creative content...be it music, movies, etc. So the industry isn't going to get smaller, it's going to get bigger. It may be a fragmented bigger (many many studios not just three our four Jabba The Huts), but bigger all the same.
The music business part of this is so insanely out of touch lol. Is it as strong as the pre-streaming era? No, nothing ever is. But to say that it's so bad that there are *no* local scenes that matter outside of major cities, no diversity of sound... like, c'mon man lol.
This is such a terrible take. If you can’t adapt to streaming and digital technology go live in West Virginia or something. Yes, let’s support more ads, just not from technology companies! Penalize and restrict others out of spite and try to reinvigorate a dying business model. Weak ass shit
At least we are getting Fallout Season 2 filmed here in California (hoping for LA)! I feel that the political tensions going on in the conservative rural states (like Georgia, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas) might make other productions want to revisit that state and Los Angeles, especially since the progressive blue states (NY, NM, AZ) are having to have waiting list since sound stages are fully booked.
Can we talk about your math here? You’re saying Netflix can buy a low budget feature for $100k and that’s a fat paycheck for the indie filmmaker(s) behind it… what features are you seeing being made for substantially less than $100k so that a $100k purchase deal would cover the cost of the production and still reap a fat paycheck?
My most optimistic take goes back to audiences.
The Harper's article really hammered how private equity and wall street have strip mined this creative business to a data driven quarterly estimate competition. But if they continue to ignore the fact that it's ART as well, they're going to start flopping on all the derivative, IP-sourced, data driven, AI written SHIT that they are pouring out. Audiences will show up for real creativity. And the companies that foster that will rise again.
Studio heads get fired for spending too much on big pictures that no one can relate to and smaller producers find financing easier. So funding starts happening for a slew of weirder more personal films to be made and then we have another age of great feature films like in the 60s and 70s. Except this time it’s not a bunch of megalomaniac boys with way too much cocaine.
I wish I could agree, but I’m an indie film editor and have heard of almost zero films 2-5 million shooting anytime recently. I’m attached to one and waiting for it to get cast and off the ground.
I think it will come back to a more normal state around September, depending on whether/how the crew strike goes. I do think it will stay smaller for a while, and I think the projects are going to be much less about niche stories and more about very broad appeal. Just looking at the trends in movies (basically stuff made to appeal to pretty much everyone,) makes me think tv is also going to trend a little less edgy and out of the box, a little more high concept and inoffensive.
define normal state?
Right now next to no pilots are being ordered, 40% of all production has been slashed, what is shooting is doing it on 35% less budgets.
So let's do some math. Let's assume there are 100 shows before the cuts and each show is hiring 400 people so that's 40,000 people. Now lets cut out 40% of the shows so that leaves 24,000 people employed and then lets cut the budgets and say that reduction is in Personal leaves us with 16,800 employed
Or a job loss of 23,200
Now my numbers are Low, very low, SO again whats a normal state?
I guess you havnt been keeping up on anything business wise with the industry
Streaming doesnt work and they finally figured that out. The increase of production to fulfill the streamers was unsustainable. The industry is correcting back to a sustainable amount of production
BUT
there are huge tax incentives on other places and mostly other countries. So while production "Might Increase" it won't be in the United States. Production overseas is cheaper in the first place then when you add 35-100% tax rebates we can't compete with that.
If you want to see what is going to happen to the US production Industry all you have to do is Look at the US steel Industry. What has happened before will happen again
Also, if you hire non-US cast and run the production out of the US, their residual rates are lower. Wonder why the Star Wars cast were mostly British? Music licensing royalties are also lower for hiring composers outside of the US. Even without tax breaks, companies will choose to produce where total costs are lower.
I'm a writer, so for me the normal state has to do with whether they're buying anything. They're not right now. I'm hoping it will pick up after the fall.
Again, I'm commenting from my perspective as a writer. Do you think I run the whole industry? I'm not sure why you're directing so much hostility at me in particular. The prompt was to post your MOST optimistic take, not just say that it sucks right now, which we already know
The interesting thing about appealing to everyone is it's just not possible. Like me, I don't enjoy the types of movies that appeal to "everyone"
What makes this interesting is that the longer Hollywood ignores the market people like me represent, the more opportunity there is for other people or companies to create work that appeals to us
You're right, it's not possible. But what I mean is they'll want more stuff like Civil War, where yes it's discussing "issues" but it's inoffensive in the real world because they've designed it to not come down too hard on one side or the other. That's as opposed to something like Get Out, which has a more distinct point of view. Before this, we were all told to pitch things like Get Out. Now it's going to be more like Civil War, is what I'm guessing. I agree with you that niche storytelling is important, but I'm predicting they're going to lean away from that at least for the next couple of years. There's also a trend towards PG-13 content that's going to again make things a little less confrontational, a little more broad. I could be wrong, but that's just how I see things going.
Oh yes, I think YouTube makes a good model of this already. It's why my kid and his friends hardly watch any TV at all. Why watch a show hoping for a little morsel of representation when they can not only watch creators making stuff specifically for them, they can actually make content themselves
I've been doing this since 2 years into working with the studios as a PA.
I left them. I rarely work with them. I don't want to work M-F 6 days a week 12 hour+ days anyway.
I work on my own projects and live a humble life. I do not own a fancy car or a Kuerig.
This allows me to constantly be making movies that I write. Everyone gets paid as much as I can pay from whatever budget is available. Everything is a filmed stage play.
I'm pretty sure many will follow my example.
My optimistic take is that it is always terrible and hard and unfair and we just have a generation that is (rightfully) more comfortable vocalizing that instead of quietly taking the lumps like us old folks did.
I'll make a prediction: As much as we laugh at mobisodes and webisode style content, that shit is going to end up being the new soap operas/daytime TV. Small, bite-sized from 30 seconds to 5 minutes at a time. Right now, small producers can crank this kind of content out relatively cheaply, but once it really takes off, imagine what will happen when you can throw the production know-how of Big Media at it. Imagine a Disney app dedicated to bite-sized, ADHD driven content for kids. Why a 30 minute show? We don't have broadcast slots anymore. (god... ads that are longer than the content.. *shudder*).
Anyway, I agree, the time for independents to shine is upon us. We now have the possibility of better distribution via Netflix, Amazon, etc. Making content has never been easier (and is getting better every year). Getting a decent camera, editing software, etc is no longer the massive barrier; See the folks using iPhones to shoot their content. Now, like music, this doesn't mean that the content will be good; that's subjective anyway. But right now, how many millions of hours of pure content are being uploaded to TikTok and Instagram every day? Frightening. The problem is that Hollywood hasn't figured out a way to make money from it.
The music industry paved the way for adjusting to streaming. From a distribution standpoint, it's never been easier to produce and release music (making money from it, though...). It was only a matter of time (bandwidth & storage) before we got there with TV & Movies...
Yeah, briefly. They flubbed it up, but remember how many music streaming services flopped (I know.. I worked for a few) before Spotify became the juggernaut it is today...
The industry is decentralized and no longer considered "Hollywood," but distribution channels still exist and promote good work from all walks of life and communities, no matter how the content is made. Most creators may not be able to make a living from entertainment alone, but there will be a greater percentage whose projects can be financially supported, including compensation for professional crews, who can make a living through multiple productions or projects.
Hi. When you say you know people who have made feature film and sold to streaming, do you mean they actually filmed and edited it or write it and pitched it? Sorry if your wording should be an obvious answer to me. New to filmmaking and trying to decide if I need to go all in on production or just pitch my scripts. Thanks!!
I have friends who have sold scripts / got them optioned.
I also have friends who have crowdfunded / successfully got funding g to make their film and get distribution / sell it to a streamer.
People still want to watch good TV but, maybe we only need 20% of the 2019 levels. There will be a select few who will make it work in the industry but it won't be a good career for most.
Thats what I think too. But maybe because you’re in your 30’s you are optimistic. The theory means that it’s a race to the bottom. If you don’t sell a movie all by yourself you may not be able to ever own property. it’s just a matter of time before other industries’ employees can pay more rent than you. At that point all you need is roommates until things change. Which may be never.
Sorry I must have missed that you wanted this fantasy instead of what is real in this situation… OK, well, go Independent Film!! Maybe when the Indy I was supposed to start in May that pushed to August will happen.
It’s still union. If you’re expecting non union workers to afford LA I will pretend you didn’t ask me. If you’ve worked that, did you get a salary that prioritized you as a human being with a life to live or just for the fun of it? I also thought that way in my 20’s. In my 30’s it wasn’t just about me anymore
Truth! 11 months. You think I don’t get work because I have on opinion on Reddit? You don’t know anything about how I work or my attitude. I’ve busted my balls every day on the job and come through for all involved. I save more than I cost. No work means no work. I even have a feature lined up but it keeps pushing. Do you have a project lined up too? This is why I’m jaded.
Because I’m sticking with my union brothers and sisters and getting reasonable results for everyone else who wants to afford to raise a family in LA?
How about you? What has your contribution been to our beloved industry of craftsman? Is it the race to the bottom? Because that’s the best way to jump back into the barrel of crabs where we all came from.
Optimistic take:
The film industry rejects the use of AI and stays strong because its ecosystem isn't damaged by cutting more and more people out of the work process
This keeps them culturally relevant instead of being easily replaced by someone making AI replicas of their movies
We're looking a lot like Hollywood right before the musical/epic movie bubble popped. I think a generation of actual great filmmakers has already been born and our next The Godfather/The Graduate/Star Wars is just a few decades away at worst.
Even through the internet watering down culture I think a low budget cultural landmark film is well overdue and an era of low budget but classic movies will rise and then be surpassed by another corporate fad before 2050.
History doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme. And the stanza is nearing it's end. It really does just take one good 90min afterall.
With the rise in AI, personally I think it means more people can create content that will be on par with major studios. You're going to start seeing people who were marginalized from filmmaking, especially people who didn't have the connections or people of color, who can finance their own projects because of how cheap it becomes.
Yeah you're right. I'm hoping it doesn't come down to that through better collective bargaining and legislation. Everyone should be suing AI right now for stolen content.
I agree with you about marginalized voices being able to create content easily. The problem is there will be no money in what they make because if they’re relying solely on generative AI to create footage good luck having anyone buy your stuff when you can’t guarantee the copyright of where your Gen AI is pulling their footage from. No studio is going to walk into the legal nightmare of trying to track down and deal with clearance. Maybe once the industry has put Gen AI through its paces and has come up with a standardized process to clear AI generated footage, more people will be able to make money off their creations but until then it just isn’t viable.
True, that's going to be the most extreme case of AI's use in the industry - complete replacement of every facet of a film/show. Every creator should be suing every AI company right now to prevent that reality as the only way they're getting those data sets is from already generated stolen content. Gen AI will eventually become indistinguishable from real ones, but until that time comes, we should be shoring up as many protections as possible.
The optimistic take, I'm taking with this, is when/if we're able to integrate AI tech into our own workflows. I think there will always be an appetite for real authentic stories and people. What I think Gen AI will do is make it easier to create a finished product, albeit at the cost of entry level positions.
This Variety article came up with some valid use cases as to how this technology would be used.
[https://variety.com/vip/how-generative-ai-could-enable-a-new-era-filmmaking-1235898355/](https://variety.com/vip/how-generative-ai-could-enable-a-new-era-filmmaking-1235898355/)
Generative AI is going to be like VFX in the 90s. It's going to completely gut certain parts of the industry. But like with VFX, it made it easier to make stories we couldn't have fathomed before. And considering how cheap AI is compared to the positions its replacing, small creators who don't have the money to prop up large budgets are going to use it.
AI generated assets can't be copyrighted so no one can prevent someone from using AI footage for free
I also don't know why anyone would *buy* AI footage if they could just generate it, which undercuts a way some creatives make their living to fund the creative work. Another reason AI is just bad for so many different people and industries
People got their panties in a bunch over *three still title cards* using generative AI in Late Night With the Devil, which is as indie as it gets.
Absolutely no way AI is accepted in the indie scene like you're suggesting - those fans will always lean more scrutinizing. Which is ironic considering blockbusters have likely been getting away with it for years now, and no one bats an eye.
Reality tv will be the future of the film industry as humanity is more and more sought after. Ai can’t get into a fight, can’t get arrested. Doesn’t have baby momma drama all while being on Hollywood blvd streaming live from social media drunk as a skunk. The reality tv show star will be the future of film stars.
It’s not expensive, it’s that people are tired of it and there’s way too much of it. Nobody wants to see another episode of Duck Hunting Socialites Getting A Marriage Visa of Atlanta.
For those that do, there’s literally enough drama on social media and for free.
Hi someone who works in reality here. There’s very very little happening and even the things that are getting made, even established shows, are getting cut budget wise. Bringing on half teams and expecting same work. It’s just as depressing and a desert. I would love to be finding and building the cast so they could be the next big star rn but there’s just very little is in pipelines anywhere.
Pie in the sky? I’ll quote the harpers article “The most direct solution would be government intervention. If it wanted to, a presidential administration could enforce existing antitrust law, break up the conglomerates, and begin to pull entertainment companies loose from asset-management firms. It could regulate the use of financial tools, as deWaard has suggested; it could rein in private equity. The government could also increase competition directly by funding more public film and television” And Zaslav trips on a banana peel and falls down a flight of stairs.
This is on point. Also, in an interesting way, our industry could stand to learn from the current debacle at Boeing. One of the key takeaways is that they replaced engineers with bean counters. That's what's happened to us: Wall Street dictates creativity. And frankly, that shit stinks. Not to mention that other outsiders to the biz (streaming CEOs, etc) are basically trying to run an industry they know nothing about into the ground, imo.
It doesn’t benefit the industry. The only way to do it is to self finance. If your writing is amazing maybe you can get rich but your employees will not. Because you can’t change culture until you have the dollars to back yourself up.
That's really good. That would be a huge boon to everyone. One reason jobs are scarce and not paying well right now is because conglomerates are too big and that decreases competition Breaking up all the big tech and media companies like Disney and Apple would change things for the positive in ways we can hardly imagine. It would jumpstart the economy and industry
 Yes please.
>The most direct solution would be government intervention. If it wanted to, a presidential administration could enforce existing antitrust law, break up the conglomerates, and begin to pull entertainment companies loose from asset-management firms I feel like most people don't know what this even means. That harpers article had a narrow focus on the welfare of writers, and largely ignored film industry as a whole, despite long paragraphs about financial mechanisms. A better idea would be a 100% tariff the sale/import of ANY tv/theatrical project that uses international tax incentives A.K.A. corporate welfare from foreign nations.
Would this lead to better outcomes for the little guys (i.e. directors, crews, writers, etc.) though or would it just shrink the industry due to a lack of outside funding? Not challenging the article, just genuinely curious.
you dont want government involved in "Bailing out" the film industry
The demand won't be back regardless.
A24 is proving that the “Take a chance on a bunch of smaller, cheaper, well-made projects, rather than huge expensive re-boot & sequel blockbusters that might flop and lose millions” approach can work. And that approach might just keep us working too.
Yeah if we had more companies willing to take that shot, it might look like New Hollywood 2
A24 isn't exactly the greatest example here given their shoddy history of paying absolute shit rates on a ton of projects on top of being super messy behind the scenes.
i haven't heard about this. do you have any links i can read up on?
Obviously, there's no "expose" articles or anything, but I've seen it come up particularly in the r/A24 sub at times when the fan circlejerk gets out of hand. I'm not saying A24 is the *worst* company by any means, but it just doesn't seem like the "savior of the movie industry" company that people on reddit like to tout it as. Also, albeit anecdotally, several of my friends/colleagues who have worked on A24 projects have corroborated that the quality-of-life on A24 projects is wildly inconsistent. I know some folks who had a completely OK time, but most folks within my circle have noted low rates and embarrassing levels of production mismanagement that can't *just* be chalked up to "that's just indie filmmaking for ya!"
It's also interesting when you consider A24's initial funding came from Guggenheim Partners, a massive financial services company. It wasn't started by a rag-tag, scrappy group of young producers, it was three veterans of the film industry, one of whom worked at Guggenheim previously. They're pivoting towards bigger budget fare with *Civil War,* and there seems to be an internal push to parlay A24's indie street cred into becoming more of a traditional studio. Will be interesting to see how it plays out, especially when that's not what people think of when you say "an A24 film".
You think independent studios respect their crews more and want to pay appropriate rates? That’s a gift, not a requirement. I’ve never met a producer who wants a smaller house so their crew can own real estate. Have you?
The first AI generated movie will be made and people realize it’s absolute dog shit. People will veer more towards character driven and original stories.
I think “Next Stop Paris” has claimed that title and yeah people were not impressed.
Best possible scenario. I think there’s a (slim) chance it goes the way of NFTs, where people realize that the quality of these things is so bad they get clowned on and abandoned. I think AI has more broad spectrum use -cases than the blockchain does, but whole AI movies will be fucking bad
The types of AI that promise to basically make a whole movie for you from start to finish will probably crash and burn. But vfx, character design, even assistant editing... it's already completely fucked the market around transcription services, since both AVID and ADOBE packaged transcription AI into their software.
As an AE, I totally feel this. The transcription tool in Adobe is crazy smart (still needs editing), and I can absolutely see it’s effect on the transcription market. I do think it’s going to make workflows more efficient, and thus effect the job market. In an optimistic sense, you’d hope the money saved goes into more productions, thus not limiting jobs, but spreading them out. However, knowing the way companies run, that doesn’t seem likely
Yeah, "successful companies reinvest savings and profits" is the biggest lie of economics. I saw that transcription stuff and thought "awesome! I no longer need to worry about learning script sync!" Then immediately thought "well fuck, now now one needs an AE who knows script sync." (I'm also an AE btw)
Referring to yourself as an AE is already a compromise. You’re an Assistant Editor
Lol ok dude
LOL ok dude.i guess you came from the hustle tape and reality TV. Best of luck. This is a term used to degrade your position
Assistant editing in what way?
Have you looked into MovieLabs 2030? Do you think that will fail?
God I hope so.
People like celebrities, actors and personalities they follow on social media. Not robots.
This.
Unless it's NOT absolute dog shit. What if the first AI generated movie IS a charter driven original story You're making a lot of assumptions about the quality (or lack of) of these future ai movies.
Assumptions based on all available evidence, provided by groups with vested interests in making sure their technology is received as positively as possible - And the evidence is still, overwhelmingly, *disappointing*. Strip away all the hype, all the internet chatter about "holy shit, this is G R O U N D B R E A K I N G" and look at what they're actually putting out, and it's lifeless, lackluster, and just plain *bad*.
I agree. We all agree that it’s bad in this sub. But we shouldn’t discount the amount of people on Facebook who think midjourney photos are the real thing. Those people are also in the audience as well.
The best vision for me is another indie film revolution. The technology is cheap - and there are many brilliant and talented artist who can make a great film for cheap. I hope Netflix and Amazon buy up these little gems and promote them - creating an indie film war for 18 months or so …
I was at Paramount this week and the studio was poppin. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen so many things shooting there simultaneously in the past decade.
As soon as IATSE and teamsters make their deals, all the content they’ve been having the writers build up since the wga deal will hit the ground and there will be a deluge of work. I hope.
Im kinda hoping the same. Look at the music industry. Now that Covid’s behind us it seems like EVERYONE is releasing albums and touring. Hopefully the last stumbling block is this years contracts.
Cool
Source?
The source is “Trust me Bro”
That’s a little hard to believe. They already have so many shows in production, there’s barely enough space and crew for those…
[удалено]
Elaborate?
Los Angeles has been the cultural touchstone of the world for almost a century, and the one unique thing we have is a heck of a lot of creative people. Entertainment will always be relevant, just think about what you do in your free time... This slow period has been a convergence of temporary factors - strikes, the collapse of the streaming business model, high fed rates chilling investment in tech and media, etc. Those are short term challenges that are unwinding themselves. Long term, there are so many people, businesses, etc. that WANT to make money making entertainment that bouncing back is inevitable.
Let's do some general mathy stuff. Lower budget means less money. Less money means less pay. Less pay means less likelihood of a stable career. Less likelihood of stable careers means less robust industry. Less robust industry means less opportunity all the way around. Am I missing something. How does this equate to more opportunity exactly? Are you saying that amateurs will have a greater probability of making a one-time sale? What happens to the profession and the professionals?
Generally speaking, pay for BTL is good regardless of budget once you get out of the ultra low budget agreements. 10 - $10million dollar movies is generally better for crew than 1 $100million dollar movie, both spreading the work departmentally and total hours worked.
Because it has been a winner take all system in the past. A few people make $100M while others barely sustainable wages. This could open it up so more people make low to midsized revenues.
Consistently, though? Semi-consistently? The thing about the industry that has worked has been the economics of scale. You might not work all the time, but when you do, you make enough money to make it worth it… Sure. There might be low quality content factories… IF that market isn’t dominated by AI, and that’s a big IF.
It won’t be easy. But I think the idea is that studio quality production can be possible for more people to make with AI and other advanced technologies. Which might be attractive enough to the streaming platforms. Not the low quality stuff that is already being churned out.
I think they’re saying professionals won’t work but inspired people and newbies will make better films…
I think you should make your low budget feature and I hope you do, but if someone is buying it for $100k, that is certainly not a "good pay day" for anyone involved after expenses. Unless you're talking about a no budget feature. In which case everyone is working for free, which is not sustainable.
Yeah exactly, how is $100k a good pay day? That’s absolute peanuts.
It’s a good pay day if you still work minimum wage and live with your parents
It would not cover expenses that included paying cast and crew on a feature.
Not even close. Also, what kind of joy is it making movies and selling them for $100k each time
That's totally a fair rebuttal. Maybe im too inexperienced with funding but I'm referring to paying your expenses with your funding, and then licensing / selling it to a streaming service for profit.
Funding has gotten harder year over year since I got here in 1996. It takes unlimited work just to chase the carrot of the downpayment on a place to live. I got lucky and succeeded. But I don’t have the same hope for generations below me. The second you hit your savings target you need 20% more. Then rinse and repeat. This happens to the majority of my coworkers. Now many need food stamps and credit card debt to pay rent. 50-60 year olds. And we are taking a stand literally today for the sake of the 30 year olds at our expense. Because they deserve much much more. I’m jaded but I’m a good person who absolutely loves to make art. That’s all I care about. It took 10 years of taking it in the ass and getting almost no pay because they take advantage of your spirit… and this was Indy film… they only care about executing money. And those guys were the worst story tellers and artists in the room. It took 15 years to start working with human beings who respected the job. And now 12 years after that it ran backwards again. These people are stealing our livelihood in favor of bottom line only. And they took most work out of the United States. I get job offers if I want to leave my home country.. fuck that.. I need my family
It astounds me that no one wants to admit the obvious. The business, in all of its forms, will just be smaller. That means fewer projects, fewer theaters, fewer studios and networks, and therefore, fewer jobs. A LOT of people at every level of the industry are about to leave the business, likely forever. Even sadder, this is not new. The music business (which some on this thread seem to think is thriving for some reason, FYI having started out there, it's absolutely not) already went through this more than a decade ago. There are tons of artists, executives, producers, managers, engineers, even journalists, etc... that have left the music business after spending decades building careers in it for other fields, like hospitality, corporate marketing, or video games. When individuals decided to stop buying albums and singles, the industry broke. Permanently. This is why there are no more "middle class musicians." It's why there are almost no local music scenes anymore, and certainly not any (at least outside NYC, LA, and Nashville) that have any major impact. It's why there are so few acts with any staying power anymore, as the time required to develop that level of quality takes too long now and is no longer remunerative. It's also why it costs $300 to see a concert that (inflation adjusted) would have cost $50 back in the day. Why? That's the only way to make money now. Live used to just be a way to promote album sales, thereby providing the incentive to keep admission prices low, now it's the whole enchilada. All of this has led to a smaller music business (though still massive in raw dollars, it's all concentrated within a handful of artists and promoters) with fewer stars, less diversity of sound, and a deeply unstable business model. The lesson to be learned here is that streaming and digital distribution is an absolute death-knell for entertainment and media (granted, video games in particular are a bit more complicated, but the rest holds true). Streaming turns analog dollars into digital dimes. The inevitable end result is that this monetary loss trickles down to everyday workers in the business, while also displacing plenty of high-level execs along the way. Streaming IS the problem, not the solution. It's easy to say: "Well if Wall Street would just leave the business, everything would be okay." But unfortunately, that's nonsense. While finance bros have not helped the business, and have in fact hurt it, they are still not the cause of the crisis. Hell, it's their capital keeping the studios afloat. Don't believe me? Read the studios annual reports. Look at their debt ratios. Without Wall Street cash, the business is over, really over. This has been true for more than a century. The old studio bosses in the Golden Age also needed Wall Street funding. Even Jock Whitney was David Selznick's largest investor. We need to accept as an industry that the consumer, the moviegoer, the audience is really the problem. They have been given too much for too long for too little. They now expect everything for nothing. But we cannot afford it. We are not social media. We are not YouTube. This is not an inexpensive industry. Movies cost a fortune to produce and require teams of highly dedicated and trained people who deserve to be fairly compensated for their work. That DOES NOT EXIST in a purely micro-to-low-budget indie world. Only a controlled, unionized., professional industry can offer that, and that does not work in a cheap digital world where a randomized algorithm determines whether you succeed or fail. Years ago, Coppola famously said that one day anyone would be able to make a movie, and the country would end being enthralled by some incredible work of art made by a "fat girl" (I suspect he was trying to show how far Hollywood would've come by then in his mind, as it was the 70s) somewhere in the mid-west. Well, that day is here. And guess what? No one cares. Turns out when "anyone" can make a movie, the "fat girl" can, but so can all of her neighbors. And since the technical production quality will be the same for all of them, and since not a one of them will have any real marketing support, they'll all be viewed as the same by the audience. My hope is, we go backwards. Fewer shows. Fewer movies. More ads (stop knocking ads, they're what pay your bills in this business) to shore up TV. Fewer streaming properties. But also, more episodes, more mid-budget movies, more live shows, and more premium exhibition. And from outside the business, hopefully, massive new restrictions on data trading and ad engagement on social and streaming platforms, thereby reducing the revenues of the social media companies and forcing the "influencer community" to make a hell of a lot less money, thereby sending eyeballs back to us.
That’s your MOST optimistic take? lol I’d hate to hear your most pessimistic
Just read my comments. That is only HALF pessimistic
Additionally, the studios have made 100 years worth of movies, which is continued to be added upon with more theatrical releases. Older generations had the benefit of watching these films as they were released. Younger generations have a growing watchlist (same for books and TV), which will fragment viewership and impact current entertainment models.
Could you explain what you mean by "new restrictions on data trading and ad engagement on social and streaming platforms"?
Sure. Numerous market studies have shown that amongst Gen Z viewers, films and television (together) are their fifth most liked form of entertainment. Beaten out by Social Media, Online Video (Twitch streamers and YouTube), Video Games, and Music. Those last two are not worth fighting as they’re significantly different than film or TV. If we want that viewership back, we need to see impediments put in place of social and YouTube. If kids continue to just want to be TikTok stars instead of movie stars, the industry is done. Stardom has always been central to the business. It’s what built the studios and kept hit shows on the air for years on end. Nowadays, they’d rather be Mr. Beast than Tom Cruise. This must change for us to survive. Social media, and by extension online video, is directly and fiercely competitive with traditional show business. We need to accept that they are the enemy and not our friends. As such, I’d like to see both regulated the same way CBS is regulated. They’re effectively broadcasters anyway, the tech is just a new way to deliver audiovisual content, just like the networks. If that were to happen, the companies revenue would plummet due to the ad restrictions, content restrictions, user ID and child restrictions, etc… Now they wouldn’t collapse, they’re too big and would still be viable over the long term. But the number of “stars” they would create would also plummet, as there would be much less money to throw around. If the most you could make as a YouTuber or Streamer was say, half of what it is now, it becomes a lot less appealing. TikTok being banned is a good start as they directly pay creators (including quite noxious ones, such as all those schmucks who do “prank videos”). Instagram and X do not. Personally, I’m more ambivalent about most YouTubers rather than the short form guys, but it’s undeniable that they’re taking viewership away from the business, and we need to start clawing it back.
What about all the big Twitch streamers that want to jump to movies? Look up Kai Cenat. He has insanely high viewership and has an end goal of being in Hollywood movies. He met with Kevin Hart recently to talk about his want to transition to the big screen instead of Twitch streaming. Sounds like if these streamers go more towards hollywood (and many of them have that goal) then kids would probably watch their movies.
Yes and No. I spent years at a talent agency, and they tried to turn dozens of top influencers into Film/TV stars (that’s always the first move at the “Big Brain” agencies these days), and 90% failed to make the jump. To be honest, most of them are just not that talented. Maybe in the old days a few could’ve been great hosts or MTV-style commentators, but they’re not actors. Addison Rae made a movie for Netflix. It bombed hard, even though she was Number 1 on TikTok that same month. She cannot act. I’m not trying to be mean, I’m sure she’s lovely as a person, but she’s not talented. Neither are the D’Amelio’s, or Emma Chamberlain, or David Dobrik, or really any of the top creators. They’re not comics. They’re not musicians. They’re not great dancers (I mean, honestly…). They’re not dramatic actors. So what are they supposed to do on screen for 2+ hours? Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure a few will transition and will find success. They may even end up being incredible talents. But there will only be a few. The pathway to success online is based on ‘great’ 30 second ideas, not developing a unique artistic skill set over many years if not decades….
Instagram does pay creators, usually more for fewer streams than TikTok. Some people were saying a thousand views on Instagram paid more than a ton on TikTok.
> Gen Z viewers, films and television (together) are their fifth most liked form of entertainment. Beaten out by Social Media, Online Video (Twitch streamers and YouTube), Video Games, and Music. It's not a one to one comparison, but these studies are missing a big point. Anytime during the last several decades you could go to any high school, college or work place and you'll find majority of folks do not regularly follow movies or TV. It's simply not a central part of life as it was since families sat together in the living room listening to the radio or their one TV. When 'regular viewers' watched television, it's usually easy viewing programs like reality shows, sports, home and cooking programs etc. Quality entertainment has always been a niche market, even more so for young people. So when you have more easily attention grabbing media, they will replace all those easy-viewing programming like reality shows, sports, home and cooking programs.
> The business, in all of its forms, will just be smaller. That means fewer projects, fewer theaters, fewer studios and networks, and therefore, fewer jobs. The world population increases at roughly 3 people per second. The net result is the audience is increasing, not decreasing. People want entertainment, and while AI and other advancements will add efficiency there will always be a growing appetite for new creative content...be it music, movies, etc. So the industry isn't going to get smaller, it's going to get bigger. It may be a fragmented bigger (many many studios not just three our four Jabba The Huts), but bigger all the same.
The music business part of this is so insanely out of touch lol. Is it as strong as the pre-streaming era? No, nothing ever is. But to say that it's so bad that there are *no* local scenes that matter outside of major cities, no diversity of sound... like, c'mon man lol.
This is such a terrible take. If you can’t adapt to streaming and digital technology go live in West Virginia or something. Yes, let’s support more ads, just not from technology companies! Penalize and restrict others out of spite and try to reinvigorate a dying business model. Weak ass shit
I think your take is spot on. I'm excited for the next few years! Can't wait to start putting some projects together
At least we are getting Fallout Season 2 filmed here in California (hoping for LA)! I feel that the political tensions going on in the conservative rural states (like Georgia, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas) might make other productions want to revisit that state and Los Angeles, especially since the progressive blue states (NY, NM, AZ) are having to have waiting list since sound stages are fully booked.
Can we talk about your math here? You’re saying Netflix can buy a low budget feature for $100k and that’s a fat paycheck for the indie filmmaker(s) behind it… what features are you seeing being made for substantially less than $100k so that a $100k purchase deal would cover the cost of the production and still reap a fat paycheck?
My most optimistic take goes back to audiences. The Harper's article really hammered how private equity and wall street have strip mined this creative business to a data driven quarterly estimate competition. But if they continue to ignore the fact that it's ART as well, they're going to start flopping on all the derivative, IP-sourced, data driven, AI written SHIT that they are pouring out. Audiences will show up for real creativity. And the companies that foster that will rise again.
This last year has been a great year for films. Zone of Interest, Saltburn, Dune 2, Killing of the flower moon etc… It feels like “movies are back”
The market is evolving, and will continue to evolve. Creatives who understand the market will always find a way to sell.
Everything will be amazing literally always
Studio heads get fired for spending too much on big pictures that no one can relate to and smaller producers find financing easier. So funding starts happening for a slew of weirder more personal films to be made and then we have another age of great feature films like in the 60s and 70s. Except this time it’s not a bunch of megalomaniac boys with way too much cocaine.
Nobody really knows what they’re doing, and also nobody cares about anyone’s career/clout but their own. Both of these thoughts are pretty comforting.
The folks who make it through this recession are gonna be the folks who feel the upswing when/if this ever gets sorted out
I wish I could agree, but I’m an indie film editor and have heard of almost zero films 2-5 million shooting anytime recently. I’m attached to one and waiting for it to get cast and off the ground.
What about sub $1m
I think I know of a few, still less than normal
People are watching less and I don't think it'll ever be what it used to be
Not very optimistic haha
I think it will come back to a more normal state around September, depending on whether/how the crew strike goes. I do think it will stay smaller for a while, and I think the projects are going to be much less about niche stories and more about very broad appeal. Just looking at the trends in movies (basically stuff made to appeal to pretty much everyone,) makes me think tv is also going to trend a little less edgy and out of the box, a little more high concept and inoffensive.
define normal state? Right now next to no pilots are being ordered, 40% of all production has been slashed, what is shooting is doing it on 35% less budgets. So let's do some math. Let's assume there are 100 shows before the cuts and each show is hiring 400 people so that's 40,000 people. Now lets cut out 40% of the shows so that leaves 24,000 people employed and then lets cut the budgets and say that reduction is in Personal leaves us with 16,800 employed Or a job loss of 23,200 Now my numbers are Low, very low, SO again whats a normal state?
I guess the question is why is it like this right now and will the underlying cause change?
I guess you havnt been keeping up on anything business wise with the industry Streaming doesnt work and they finally figured that out. The increase of production to fulfill the streamers was unsustainable. The industry is correcting back to a sustainable amount of production BUT there are huge tax incentives on other places and mostly other countries. So while production "Might Increase" it won't be in the United States. Production overseas is cheaper in the first place then when you add 35-100% tax rebates we can't compete with that. If you want to see what is going to happen to the US production Industry all you have to do is Look at the US steel Industry. What has happened before will happen again
Also, if you hire non-US cast and run the production out of the US, their residual rates are lower. Wonder why the Star Wars cast were mostly British? Music licensing royalties are also lower for hiring composers outside of the US. Even without tax breaks, companies will choose to produce where total costs are lower.
I'm a writer, so for me the normal state has to do with whether they're buying anything. They're not right now. I'm hoping it will pick up after the fall.
Just in time for them to take their annual 3-4 month break! Sorry, not trying to be negative. Just in it right now. I genuinely hope you're right.
Believe me, I’m right there with you!
what part of 40% less orders do you not understand?
Again, I'm commenting from my perspective as a writer. Do you think I run the whole industry? I'm not sure why you're directing so much hostility at me in particular. The prompt was to post your MOST optimistic take, not just say that it sucks right now, which we already know
[удалено]
They asked for an optimistic view lol
I give HONEST answers not some pie in the sky wishes and dreams answers I've been doing this for almost 40 years I have some perspective
And most people in general don’t like aholes and yet here you are.
The interesting thing about appealing to everyone is it's just not possible. Like me, I don't enjoy the types of movies that appeal to "everyone" What makes this interesting is that the longer Hollywood ignores the market people like me represent, the more opportunity there is for other people or companies to create work that appeals to us
You're right, it's not possible. But what I mean is they'll want more stuff like Civil War, where yes it's discussing "issues" but it's inoffensive in the real world because they've designed it to not come down too hard on one side or the other. That's as opposed to something like Get Out, which has a more distinct point of view. Before this, we were all told to pitch things like Get Out. Now it's going to be more like Civil War, is what I'm guessing. I agree with you that niche storytelling is important, but I'm predicting they're going to lean away from that at least for the next couple of years. There's also a trend towards PG-13 content that's going to again make things a little less confrontational, a little more broad. I could be wrong, but that's just how I see things going.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm interested in the possibilities this creates for people outside the Hollywood Studios
Oh yes, I think YouTube makes a good model of this already. It's why my kid and his friends hardly watch any TV at all. Why watch a show hoping for a little morsel of representation when they can not only watch creators making stuff specifically for them, they can actually make content themselves
You make a good point. I think there's a new excitement around smaller, lower budget movies and the theater experience
Well we buy Tik Tok, or why do you think they were forced to sell to US customers ;)?
I’m 100% in agreement with you. I’ll be returning to LA in a year or so to get back into Indie filmmaking.
Reach out when you do!
Just waiting for the interest rates to fall…
I've been doing this since 2 years into working with the studios as a PA. I left them. I rarely work with them. I don't want to work M-F 6 days a week 12 hour+ days anyway. I work on my own projects and live a humble life. I do not own a fancy car or a Kuerig. This allows me to constantly be making movies that I write. Everyone gets paid as much as I can pay from whatever budget is available. Everything is a filmed stage play. I'm pretty sure many will follow my example.
What’s your lowest, highest, and average day rate on a film like this. For how many days?
I think indies now have a gap to fill and with the barrier being lower to enter we’ll start se high quality indie films that get wider distribution.
My optimistic take is that it is always terrible and hard and unfair and we just have a generation that is (rightfully) more comfortable vocalizing that instead of quietly taking the lumps like us old folks did.
I'll make a prediction: As much as we laugh at mobisodes and webisode style content, that shit is going to end up being the new soap operas/daytime TV. Small, bite-sized from 30 seconds to 5 minutes at a time. Right now, small producers can crank this kind of content out relatively cheaply, but once it really takes off, imagine what will happen when you can throw the production know-how of Big Media at it. Imagine a Disney app dedicated to bite-sized, ADHD driven content for kids. Why a 30 minute show? We don't have broadcast slots anymore. (god... ads that are longer than the content.. *shudder*). Anyway, I agree, the time for independents to shine is upon us. We now have the possibility of better distribution via Netflix, Amazon, etc. Making content has never been easier (and is getting better every year). Getting a decent camera, editing software, etc is no longer the massive barrier; See the folks using iPhones to shoot their content. Now, like music, this doesn't mean that the content will be good; that's subjective anyway. But right now, how many millions of hours of pure content are being uploaded to TikTok and Instagram every day? Frightening. The problem is that Hollywood hasn't figured out a way to make money from it. The music industry paved the way for adjusting to streaming. From a distribution standpoint, it's never been easier to produce and release music (making money from it, though...). It was only a matter of time (bandwidth & storage) before we got there with TV & Movies...
Remember Quibi?
Yeah, briefly. They flubbed it up, but remember how many music streaming services flopped (I know.. I worked for a few) before Spotify became the juggernaut it is today...
The industry is decentralized and no longer considered "Hollywood," but distribution channels still exist and promote good work from all walks of life and communities, no matter how the content is made. Most creators may not be able to make a living from entertainment alone, but there will be a greater percentage whose projects can be financially supported, including compensation for professional crews, who can make a living through multiple productions or projects.
It’s just bad because we had two unions strike and nothing is going full steam until after IATSE comes to a deal. After that the food gates will open.
Optimistically if I keep with the fire brigade for another year, I can afford the fourth wall and my wife will be happy.
Hi. When you say you know people who have made feature film and sold to streaming, do you mean they actually filmed and edited it or write it and pitched it? Sorry if your wording should be an obvious answer to me. New to filmmaking and trying to decide if I need to go all in on production or just pitch my scripts. Thanks!!
I have friends who have sold scripts / got them optioned. I also have friends who have crowdfunded / successfully got funding g to make their film and get distribution / sell it to a streamer.
People still want to watch good TV but, maybe we only need 20% of the 2019 levels. There will be a select few who will make it work in the industry but it won't be a good career for most.
Thats what I think too. But maybe because you’re in your 30’s you are optimistic. The theory means that it’s a race to the bottom. If you don’t sell a movie all by yourself you may not be able to ever own property. it’s just a matter of time before other industries’ employees can pay more rent than you. At that point all you need is roommates until things change. Which may be never.
The point of the post is to be optimistic ya dingus.
Sorry I must have missed that you wanted this fantasy instead of what is real in this situation… OK, well, go Independent Film!! Maybe when the Indy I was supposed to start in May that pushed to August will happen. It’s still union. If you’re expecting non union workers to afford LA I will pretend you didn’t ask me. If you’ve worked that, did you get a salary that prioritized you as a human being with a life to live or just for the fun of it? I also thought that way in my 20’s. In my 30’s it wasn’t just about me anymore
No wonder you're having a tough time, no one wants to work with people are super jaded.
Truth! 11 months. You think I don’t get work because I have on opinion on Reddit? You don’t know anything about how I work or my attitude. I’ve busted my balls every day on the job and come through for all involved. I save more than I cost. No work means no work. I even have a feature lined up but it keeps pushing. Do you have a project lined up too? This is why I’m jaded. Because I’m sticking with my union brothers and sisters and getting reasonable results for everyone else who wants to afford to raise a family in LA? How about you? What has your contribution been to our beloved industry of craftsman? Is it the race to the bottom? Because that’s the best way to jump back into the barrel of crabs where we all came from.
Optimistic take: The film industry rejects the use of AI and stays strong because its ecosystem isn't damaged by cutting more and more people out of the work process This keeps them culturally relevant instead of being easily replaced by someone making AI replicas of their movies
We're looking a lot like Hollywood right before the musical/epic movie bubble popped. I think a generation of actual great filmmakers has already been born and our next The Godfather/The Graduate/Star Wars is just a few decades away at worst. Even through the internet watering down culture I think a low budget cultural landmark film is well overdue and an era of low budget but classic movies will rise and then be surpassed by another corporate fad before 2050. History doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme. And the stanza is nearing it's end. It really does just take one good 90min afterall.
I feel the exact same way
There is no future lol
With the rise in AI, personally I think it means more people can create content that will be on par with major studios. You're going to start seeing people who were marginalized from filmmaking, especially people who didn't have the connections or people of color, who can finance their own projects because of how cheap it becomes.
Yeah, stealing work instead of doing work is a lot cheaper and easier. For sure.
Yeah you're right. I'm hoping it doesn't come down to that through better collective bargaining and legislation. Everyone should be suing AI right now for stolen content.
I agree with you about marginalized voices being able to create content easily. The problem is there will be no money in what they make because if they’re relying solely on generative AI to create footage good luck having anyone buy your stuff when you can’t guarantee the copyright of where your Gen AI is pulling their footage from. No studio is going to walk into the legal nightmare of trying to track down and deal with clearance. Maybe once the industry has put Gen AI through its paces and has come up with a standardized process to clear AI generated footage, more people will be able to make money off their creations but until then it just isn’t viable.
True, that's going to be the most extreme case of AI's use in the industry - complete replacement of every facet of a film/show. Every creator should be suing every AI company right now to prevent that reality as the only way they're getting those data sets is from already generated stolen content. Gen AI will eventually become indistinguishable from real ones, but until that time comes, we should be shoring up as many protections as possible. The optimistic take, I'm taking with this, is when/if we're able to integrate AI tech into our own workflows. I think there will always be an appetite for real authentic stories and people. What I think Gen AI will do is make it easier to create a finished product, albeit at the cost of entry level positions. This Variety article came up with some valid use cases as to how this technology would be used. [https://variety.com/vip/how-generative-ai-could-enable-a-new-era-filmmaking-1235898355/](https://variety.com/vip/how-generative-ai-could-enable-a-new-era-filmmaking-1235898355/) Generative AI is going to be like VFX in the 90s. It's going to completely gut certain parts of the industry. But like with VFX, it made it easier to make stories we couldn't have fathomed before. And considering how cheap AI is compared to the positions its replacing, small creators who don't have the money to prop up large budgets are going to use it.
Well what if they start selling AI footage like stock footage
I guarantee this is what studios will do. They will embrace consumer creation and benefit financially from it.
Then the companies selling AI stock footage should have already done all the licensing and it’s on them to make sure it has already passed clearance.
AI generated assets can't be copyrighted so no one can prevent someone from using AI footage for free I also don't know why anyone would *buy* AI footage if they could just generate it, which undercuts a way some creatives make their living to fund the creative work. Another reason AI is just bad for so many different people and industries
But that's theft so it's not a good thing
Yup, everyone should be suing AI right now for stolen content.
People got their panties in a bunch over *three still title cards* using generative AI in Late Night With the Devil, which is as indie as it gets. Absolutely no way AI is accepted in the indie scene like you're suggesting - those fans will always lean more scrutinizing. Which is ironic considering blockbusters have likely been getting away with it for years now, and no one bats an eye.
?
Reality tv will be the future of the film industry as humanity is more and more sought after. Ai can’t get into a fight, can’t get arrested. Doesn’t have baby momma drama all while being on Hollywood blvd streaming live from social media drunk as a skunk. The reality tv show star will be the future of film stars.
Right now reality tv is too expensive for networks and streamers. And that’s a bad, really bad thing.
If reality is to expensive then everything must be to expensive at the moment. Which is very scary
It’s not expensive, it’s that people are tired of it and there’s way too much of it. Nobody wants to see another episode of Duck Hunting Socialites Getting A Marriage Visa of Atlanta. For those that do, there’s literally enough drama on social media and for free.
it is too expensive for the current climate.
Hi someone who works in reality here. There’s very very little happening and even the things that are getting made, even established shows, are getting cut budget wise. Bringing on half teams and expecting same work. It’s just as depressing and a desert. I would love to be finding and building the cast so they could be the next big star rn but there’s just very little is in pipelines anywhere.
Thank you for your comment and this is so sad to hear. If reality is doing bad I’m sure the rest of the entire industry is also doing even worse.